You've got to distinguish between centre clearances, where numbers are always even, and clearances from other stoppages around the ground, where generally they are not.  For stoppages away from the centre square, we will generally allow the opposition a + 1, while our spare player will be behind the ball.  Our wager is that enabling the intercept mark behind the ball will more than make up for any advatnge they get from winning clearance at the stoppage, particularly given the quality we've got in the ruck and around the ball means we think this advantege will be minimised across a game.  

When we get beaten out of the centre, the explanation has varied, I think.  If we're not just getting outplayed there (like last night), the opposition has done their homework and operate on the basis that Gawn and Grundy will win most hitouts, and set up accordingly.

I still reckon our rucks should often just belt the ball forward, allowing our mids to swarm in that direction, Clark Keating style.

4 hours ago, demon3165 said:

Well, ask Yze he's the midfield coach, don't know what happened to the idea that if you are getting beaten you stop the bleeding then transition back to your plan seems you wait till half time to say something, cannot figure that one out. 

For me, it looks like we are rotating more midfielders through the centre bounce.

Sparrow, Pickett, Harmes went straight in yesterday when subbed.

The winning factor yesterday was that. Rowell & Anderson couldn’t hold up their clearance dominance for 4 quarters, we rotated more players through and come business time when we had to step up Oliver & Petracca  had the energy to do so.

Which I think is why we have not lost a last quarter this year yet.

 

Related to this, there's some criticism lurking of Oliver that he is accumulating disposals and not really being potent, but it isn't as if he is being a seagull out there - he is accumulating in very difficult circumstances.

Not only is he going at 50% contested possessions, but he's also earning almost 5 intercepts a game - that is defender numbers.

In fact, after a quick scroll through the rankings, Oliver is the only inside mid player with anything close to that number of intercepts. Even for more open-role players who aren't always defenders, there is only really Brayshaw and Acres up there.

If you combine intercepts (4.9 vs best 9.6) and score involvements (8.25 v best being 9.0) you get Clayton Oliver. Add to that the contested possessions, clearances and tackles of his old core role, and you get Clayton Oliver then a lot of daylight.

Oliver's game has changed and it is becoming much more rounded, and potentially more valuable than the simpler clearance beast.

It is possible that Oliver is quietly making the changes to become the most complete midfielder ever, right in front of our eyes, and we aren't noticing because it doesn't involve total domination of the usual statistics.

The matchup with Collingwood intrigues me. I think we’ll see a finals type set up. I’d say stoppage clearance will be key to a win. I’d suggest our big 4 will play more minutes together at stoppages. I really want to win

 

 

 

1 hour ago, Little Goffy said:

 

Related to this, there's some criticism lurking of Oliver that he is accumulating disposals and not really being potent, but it isn't as if he is being a seagull out there - he is accumulating in very difficult circumstances.

Not only is he going at 50% contested possessions, but he's also earning almost 5 intercepts a game - that is defender numbers.

In fact, after a quick scroll through the rankings, Oliver is the only inside mid player with anything close to that number of intercepts. Even for more open-role players who aren't always defenders, there is only really Brayshaw and Acres up there.

If you combine intercepts (4.9 vs best 9.6) and score involvements (8.25 v best being 9.0) you get Clayton Oliver. Add to that the contested possessions, clearances and tackles of his old core role, and you get Clayton Oliver then a lot of daylight.

Oliver's game has changed and it is becoming much more rounded, and potentially more valuable than the simpler clearance beast.

It is possible that Oliver is quietly making the changes to become the most complete midfielder ever, right in front of our eyes, and we aren't noticing because it doesn't involve total domination of the usual statistics.

BEST POST FOR A LOOOOONG WHILE!🤩

10 hours ago, The heart beats true said:

I posted this in the post game thread, but if you want some different insight watch the press conference….

Watching Goodwin speak in the presser he was very confident that we could get them on turnover.

I feel like we are trying to win differently. For years we’ve needed to smash the contested possessions, where as I think now we are often having a look at breaking even there, which means we use our match winners more sparingly. Goodwin spoke about this in the presser. I think it’s about winning games, but not taxing our best players every week, so they are fresher when needed.

 

Well they were sure needed last night Q4

Are there any data / stats on Q4 clearances both centre and around the ground for us vs the other quarters?

The OP is misguided IMO.

We have lost the clearance count three times this year - to the Dogs, Brisbane and Gold Coast.

Those sides are ranked 1st, 2nd and 3rd for average clearance differential this year.

If we are less dominant at clearances this year, it is IMO for three key reasons:

1. We are rotating a lot more players through the middle and are resting Gawn, Oliver, Petracca and Viney far more than we did in 2021-22
2. We are trying to be a more varied and diverse side that doesn't rely exclusively on clearance/CP dominance to score (it's working so far)
3. We've played half this season so far without Gawn

I reckon there are three contributing factors:

1. We are amazing to watch spreading FORWARD from a stoppage. Trac and Sparrow are naturals and Clarry is often looking for a forward handball. If this doesn't work, we are wide open for the opposition to run forward with all our players caught behind them. Our stoppage handballing this year has been really poor, so we mess up more stoppage forward thrusts than we get correct.
2. Our gameplan sits on a concrete foundation of a very tight half back safety net. It often feels like we surrender the middle ground, with Langdon, Hunter, Brayshaw and Jordon sprinting into defensive position to assist at half back. It feels like we place more emphasis on this than we do stoppages.
3. Oppositions have figured out how Trac, Clarry and Viney work together (which is poetry when it works) and set up to counter it. Only dumb teams (e.g. North last week) allow Trac to sprint through a stoppage to feed off Clarry, Viney and co.

As an extra thought, we have been more fumbly this year than I can remember. Our top ball handlers like Trac, Fritsch and Bowey have been unclean at times and we have missed the silk of Salem's composure. This is causing turnovers at a higher rate (this is a random observation and opinion, no stats to back it up).

Some really brilliantly thoughtful and switched on responses in this thread. It's why Demonland is the place to go for proper footy analysis. You'd think an AFL TV or radio show would be, but sadly not.

I remember Round 2 of 2019. My sister and I went down to Geelong in the pelting rain to watch us face the Cats. That night, we won clearance by +15, had +24 inside 50s, but lost by 80 points.

For years, we bemoaned the fact we were too one dimensional and completely reliant on stoppages to be in games. 2019 was a year that saw us regularly win clearance (as we had during 2018) and yet we finished 2nd last.

Chris Scott's MO for years at Geelong was  to essentially slingshot off the back of opposition attacking thrusts from clearance.

Goodwin for many years went the opposite way. Play territory by winning clearance and taking territory. Repeat entries and pressure on the opposition defence would eventually lead to scores. Play a high press that would lock the ball in our A50 and sit an anchor (ideally our quickest player or best reader of play) as the deepest goalkeeper. Aggressive and vulnerable out the back, if we lost key 1v1s or failed to capitalise on the territory dominance with scoreboard pressure. 

Goodwin evolved this approach in mid 2020 (the St Kilda win was the clear stand out in style, despite us only winning narrowly) and was perfected in 2021, where post stoppage pressure became king. Winning the post clearance battle was our concern and Goodwin would often speak about this in pressers.

This post clearance focus enabled us to continue playing the territory game, but instead of being overly reliant on stoppages, we wanted to pressure the opposition stoppage as extremely as possible, to ensure they'd simply hand it back to our interceptors or our defence would have time to mop up ground balls. We won a flag playing this way and Chris Scott aped much of Goodwin's blueprint to win it last year.

This year, we're sweating turnovers and essentially cashing in big on turnover. I'm not sure of the latest data and @WheeloRatings is usually all over this stuff, but as of mid April, we were league leaders for points from turnover. Tellingly, at the same stage, Gold Coast were the best stoppage team and second worst points from turnover team. Coincidence? It means we're less reliant on stoppages for scores and are more focused on scoring off turnover. Conversely, Gold Coast are more like us circa 2018. Reliant on stoppages for goals and vulnerable on the turnover.

As an aside but also another facet of our shift away from an over reliance on stoppages is Max. As a ruckman, IMV he's too predictable. He's a great tap to advantage ruck, but as a result, the opposition can also read him like a book. This is where Grundy's different style really suits us and gives us a different gear if Max is being sharked. Arresting momentum in high pressure games could be crucial and having two such different rucks will constantly keep the opposition guessing and hopefully unable to build too much momentum against us.

The other thing Grundy gives us is phenomenal follow up at ground level, which suits our post clearance defence method. So it's not just Clarry, Trac, Viney or Sparrow that's at you, but Grundy as well.

The points from turnover is a key stat to watch for the remainder of the year. It's not one available on the AFL ap, but in live telecasts and on the scoreboard at games, it's regularly shown as a key pathway to scores, along with points from stoppages.

We can get the ball out the front of stoppages and get dangerous, deep entries that lead to scores - think the 2021 GF. But everyone knows we can do this and tries to ensure this route 1 option is impossible. It felt like at times in 2022, we were trying to be too pure with these out the front clearances and would often see handballs or knock ons intercepted by the opposition, which left us vulnerable going back the other way out of the stoppage, or would simply lead to a breakdown and a stoppage that should have been a reasonable clearance going forward to the 6-6-6.

We may have wanted to be more precise from stoppage last year, because our inability to win ground ball and defend rebound ground ball was lacking. Incidentally, this is likely why BBB and Tmac find themselves out of the side.

In any case, I think we've made a number of key adjustments in 2023, from the perfectionistic out the front clearances and predictable, slower ball movement to the pockets, and reverted to a quicker more central ball movement (at least upon 50 entry) with better ground ball competitors in our forward 50 to capitalise at ground level. With this, the data seems to support a clear shift to feasting on turnover as opposed to goals from stoppage.

Edited May 7, 20231 yr by A F

Something that the coaches (especially Yze) need to address. 
 

I reckon it’s a combo of our tactics are becoming stale and the opposition have cottoned on and midfield complacency. Too often in games this year, when opposition gets a run on, it’s because our mids simply aren’t working hard enough for each other.

As has been mentioned in a few places, in (large?) part because we're resting/rotating our big 3 clearance specialists: Oliver, Viney, Petracca, the latter 2 in particular. If you look at the stats for this year, Petracca and Viney are only attending just over 60% of centre bounces.

Of course, there are other stoppages ...

Lots of insightful commentary here, reminds me of the tactics and all that jazz thread. I will add, I don’t think we are just increasingly varying the midfield rotations to ensure our big 4 have fresher legs in the 4th quarter, although I do agree that is part of it. I think we are also addressing what happened last year when we just ran out of legs toward the end of the season.

 Giving our main midfielders a bit of reduced time in the middle of things makes us both less predictable and and hopefully reduces their fatigue levels across a long season.

 Last night I felt we were beaten on the spread by Anderson, often leveraging their knowledge that we go -1 around the clearance. He played it particularly well and deserves credit for some really well executed plays. He was doing what Clarry and Trac often do and trusting his team mate to win the ball so getting on his bike early and spreading for the receive. We could have put some time into him and I thought that was what goodie was going to use harmes for when he subbed him on but he obviously has other plans.

Out of interest let's take a look at this season so far vs our 2021 flag year....

Top four in CENTER clearances (on averages) so far in 2023 are...

Clarry 3.5

Viney 2.4

Tracc 2.4

Gawny 1.4

TOTAL 9.7

5th Grundy 1.1

 

Season 2021 (top 4)

Clarry 2.9

Tracc 2.8

Viney 2.0

Gawny 1.8

TOTAL 9.5

5th Harmes 0.9

 

STOPPAGE Clearances 2023 (Top 4)

Tracc 3.6

Clarry 3.4

Grundy 2.7

Viney 2.4

TOTAL 12.1

5th Hunter 1.8

 

Season 2021 (top 4)

Clarry 4.5

Tracc 3.5

Viney 3.3

Gawn 2.6

TOTAL 13.9

5th Harmes 2.1

So center clearances are about even (stats don't tell you where the players are directing them though....quality factor?)

Stoppage clearances we are down roughly 2 clearances a match with Clarry & Viney each down approx one clearance per match (so far)

Edited May 7, 20231 yr by Demon Dynasty

Taken from @WheeloRatings site

Centre bounce attendance:

Oliver 86%

Viney 71%

Petracca 54%

Grundy 50%

Gawn 50%

Sparrow 43%

Jordon 25%

Harmes 11%

Pickett 11%

 

55 minutes ago, layzie said:

Taken from @WheeloRatings site

Centre bounce attendance:

Oliver 86%

Viney 71%

Petracca 54%

Grundy 50%

Gawn 50%

Sparrow 43%

Jordon 25%

Harmes 11%

Pickett 11%

 

Which would suggest we tried to protect our mids by bringing on Harmes in the last quarter to provide an extra rotation chop out. 

11 hours ago, Maldonboy38 said:

I reckon there are three contributing factors:

1. We are amazing to watch spreading FORWARD from a stoppage. Trac and Sparrow are naturals and Clarry is often looking for a forward handball. If this doesn't work, we are wide open for the opposition to run forward with all our players caught behind them. Our stoppage handballing this year has been really poor, so we mess up more stoppage forward thrusts than we get correct.
2. Our gameplan sits on a concrete foundation of a very tight half back safety net. It often feels like we surrender the middle ground, with Langdon, Hunter, Brayshaw and Jordon sprinting into defensive position to assist at half back. It feels like we place more emphasis on this than we do stoppages.
3. Oppositions have figured out how Trac, Clarry and Viney work together (which is poetry when it works) and set up to counter it. Only dumb teams (e.g. North last week) allow Trac to sprint through a stoppage to feed off Clarry, Viney and co.

As an extra thought, we have been more fumbly this year than I can remember. Our top ball handlers like Trac, Fritsch and Bowey have been unclean at times and we have missed the silk of Salem's composure. This is causing turnovers at a higher rate (this is a random observation and opinion, no stats to back it up).

This is very much a life and die by the sword type of situation. GC seemed to have midfielders sitting forward side of the contest in their D50 and when we eventually turned it over, they would just waltz out of D50 without too much fuss and setup for an extremely fast counter-attack. I couldn't believe Goody didn't push up an extra defender to stop this.  

14 hours ago, A F said:

With this, the data seems to support a clear shift to feasting on turnover as opposed to goals from stoppage.

Why can't we do both?

Whilst it seems to me that we get our hands on the ball first at centre square stoppages, we don't seem to be able to convert possession into forward thrusts. Why not?

Solve this r4iddle and we enhance our chances greatly.

1 hour ago, tiers said:

Why can't we do both?

Whilst it seems to me that we get our hands on the ball first at centre square stoppages, we don't seem to be able to convert possession into forward thrusts. Why not?

Solve this r4iddle and we enhance our chances greatly.

We can, but my point was we're no longer reliant on it. And the basis for the OP was "winning" clearances, so if our clearances result in better scoring opportunities and theirs are all rushed and we manage to force them wide or intercept, but we lose the clearance count, what's the problem?

It's the quality of the clearance that matters.

Edited May 8, 20231 yr by A F

Last year we averaged 1.1 clearances more than our opponents each game. That came entirely from stoppage clearances, we were even on centre clearances.

This year we average 1.8 clearances less than our opponents each game. That again comes almost entirely from stoppage clearances, which are -1.9 (centre clearances are +0.1).

I looked a bit further and found that then stoppage clearance numbers are down this year - our opponents this year are averaging fewer of them per game than they did last year. The issue is that we are too, and proportionately more.

We're playing a game with fewer stoppages because our ball movement is more direct and aggressive. We're also prioritising stoppages less because we're setting up in a way to score of turnover (I'd love to find the data on scores from turnovers so that I could compare but I am confident that our proportion of scores from turnovers in 2023 is up on 2022).

20 hours ago, A F said:

Some really brilliantly thoughtful and switched on responses in this thread. It's why Demonland is the place to go for proper footy analysis. You'd think an AFL TV or radio show would be, but sadly not.

I remember Round 2 of 2019. My sister and I went down to Geelong in the pelting rain to watch us face the Cats. That night, we won clearance by +15, had +24 inside 50s, but lost by 80 points.

For years, we bemoaned the fact we were too one dimensional and completely reliant on stoppages to be in games. 2019 was a year that saw us regularly win clearance (as we had during 2018) and yet we finished 2nd last.

Chris Scott's MO for years at Geelong was  to essentially slingshot off the back of opposition attacking thrusts from clearance.

Goodwin for many years went the opposite way. Play territory by winning clearance and taking territory. Repeat entries and pressure on the opposition defence would eventually lead to scores. Play a high press that would lock the ball in our A50 and sit an anchor (ideally our quickest player or best reader of play) as the deepest goalkeeper. Aggressive and vulnerable out the back, if we lost key 1v1s or failed to capitalise on the territory dominance with scoreboard pressure. 

Goodwin evolved this approach in mid 2020 (the St Kilda win was the clear stand out in style, despite us only winning narrowly) and was perfected in 2021, where post stoppage pressure became king. Winning the post clearance battle was our concern and Goodwin would often speak about this in pressers.

This post clearance focus enabled us to continue playing the territory game, but instead of being overly reliant on stoppages, we wanted to pressure the opposition stoppage as extremely as possible, to ensure they'd simply hand it back to our interceptors or our defence would have time to mop up ground balls. We won a flag playing this way and Chris Scott aped much of Goodwin's blueprint to win it last year.

This year, we're sweating turnovers and essentially cashing in big on turnover. I'm not sure of the latest data and @WheeloRatings is usually all over this stuff, but as of mid April, we were league leaders for points from turnover. Tellingly, at the same stage, Gold Coast were the best stoppage team and second worst points from turnover team. Coincidence? It means we're less reliant on stoppages for scores and are more focused on scoring off turnover. Conversely, Gold Coast are more like us circa 2018. Reliant on stoppages for goals and vulnerable on the turnover.

As an aside but also another facet of our shift away from an over reliance on stoppages is Max. As a ruckman, IMV he's too predictable. He's a great tap to advantage ruck, but as a result, the opposition can also read him like a book. This is where Grundy's different style really suits us and gives us a different gear if Max is being sharked. Arresting momentum in high pressure games could be crucial and having two such different rucks will constantly keep the opposition guessing and hopefully unable to build too much momentum against us.

The other thing Grundy gives us is phenomenal follow up at ground level, which suits our post clearance defence method. So it's not just Clarry, Trac, Viney or Sparrow that's at you, but Grundy as well.

The points from turnover is a key stat to watch for the remainder of the year. It's not one available on the AFL ap, but in live telecasts and on the scoreboard at games, it's regularly shown as a key pathway to scores, along with points from stoppages.

We can get the ball out the front of stoppages and get dangerous, deep entries that lead to scores - think the 2021 GF. But everyone knows we can do this and tries to ensure this route 1 option is impossible. It felt like at times in 2022, we were trying to be too pure with these out the front clearances and would often see handballs or knock ons intercepted by the opposition, which left us vulnerable going back the other way out of the stoppage, or would simply lead to a breakdown and a stoppage that should have been a reasonable clearance going forward to the 6-6-6.

We may have wanted to be more precise from stoppage last year, because our inability to win ground ball and defend rebound ground ball was lacking. Incidentally, this is likely why BBB and Tmac find themselves out of the side.

In any case, I think we've made a number of key adjustments in 2023, from the perfectionistic out the front clearances and predictable, slower ball movement to the pockets, and reverted to a quicker more central ball movement (at least upon 50 entry) with better ground ball competitors in our forward 50 to capitalise at ground level. With this, the data seems to support a clear shift to feasting on turnover as opposed to goals from stoppage.

Just on scores from turnovers, Melbourne ranks 1st in points from turnovers, 3rd in scores (goals + behinds) from turnovers, and 2nd in points differential from turnovers. Melbourne doesn't score as often as Brisbane and Geelong from turnovers, but Melbourne's accuracy puts them on top for total points.

Points from turnovers

512: Melbourne
483: Brisbane
481: Geelong
454: Essendon
440: Sydney
438: St Kilda
404: Greater Western Sydney
399: Adelaide
392: Fremantle
381: Carlton
380: Port Adelaide
363: Western Bulldogs
362: Collingwood
344: Richmond
336: Gold Coast
321: West Coast
314: North Melbourne
294: Hawthorn

Scores from turnovers

128: Brisbane
126: Geelong
122: Melbourne
120: Sydney
119: Essendon
114: Adelaide
113: St Kilda
111: Carlton
109: Greater Western Sydney
107: Collingwood
104: Richmond
103: Western Bulldogs
102: Fremantle
100: Port Adelaide
91: West Coast
91: Gold Coast
84: North Melbourne
84: Hawthorn

Points from turnovers differential

+193: St Kilda
+179: Melbourne
+101: Brisbane
+97: Essendon
+73: Geelong
+45: Adelaide
+42: Sydney
+15: Collingwood
+12: Carlton
+10: Western Bulldogs
-13: Fremantle
-15: Port Adelaide
-31: Greater Western Sydney
-32: Richmond
-114: Gold Coast
-154: North Melbourne
-177: West Coast
-231: Hawthorn

Points conceded from turnovers

245: St Kilda
333: Melbourne
347: Collingwood
353: Western Bulldogs
354: Adelaide
357: Essendon
369: Carlton
376: Richmond
382: Brisbane
395: Port Adelaide
398: Sydney
405: Fremantle
408: Geelong
435: Greater Western Sydney
450: Gold Coast
468: North Melbourne
498: West Coast
525: Hawthorn

Legend. Thanks @WheeloRatings. 👏

Some further fodder for the Podcast tonight @Demonland @george_on_the_outer @binman

18 hours ago, A F said:

We can, but my point was we're no longer reliant on it. And the basis for the OP was "winning" clearances, so if our clearances result in better scoring opportunities and theirs are all rushed and we manage to force them wide or intercept, but we lose the clearance count, what's the problem?

It's the quality of the clearance that matters.

It absolutely is and if there were a quicker way to grade clearances in terms of quality it would be amazing but you just have to go with the eye test on this. 

It feels like we are much more comfortable having the opposition win stoppages, as long as they are under intense pressure when they dispose, as we trust our ability to create a turnover / transition / score from it. 

While every team is seeking "clean" stoppage clearance, it may be that a "dirty" stoppage clearance is very similar to a "dirty" stoppage opposition clearance, given our ability to win back the ball from an opposition"dirty" clearance, and transition it to our advantage.

So being the second most scored against team from turnovers translates to us running forward at turnovers as we expect to win them??

On 5/7/2023 at 10:27 PM, A F said:

This year, we're sweating turnovers and essentially cashing in big on turnover. I'm not sure of the latest data and @WheeloRatings is usually all over this stuff, but as of mid April, we were league leaders for points from turnover.

@A F @WheeloRatings - where can I find team stats for scores from turnover, scores from stoppages?